That's why Apple's pro-consumer experience stand is so important. Apple is possibly the only company besides possibly Microsoft who can't be bullied by the cellular networks into playing their branding and "value-add" games. And yes, AT&T and Sprint are doing it too. It would be like trying to sell electricity 2.0.
This editorial about the Samsung Fascinate sums it up nicely:
It's getting to the point where Android fans are concerned about the direction this is going.
Apple, Google and Microsoft are bigger than every single carrier in the world --- it means that they are bullying the carriers, not the other way around.
Co-incidentally Apple, Google and Microsoft are constantly being under the government radar for anti-trust investigations.
You don't like the red Verizon UI, fine --- but Verizon is no where close to being investigated by anyone for anti-trust bullying.
That's why Apple's pro-consumer experience stand is so important. Apple is possibly the only company besides possibly Microsoft who can't be bullied by the cellular networks into playing their branding and "value-add" games. And yes, AT&T and Sprint are doing it too. It would be like trying to sell electricity 2.0.
This editorial about the Samsung Fascinate sums it up nicely:
I was involved in carrier negotiations in the past. The issue is that the cellular carriers feel they can:
1. Monetize apps that they control over and above the data plan price (i.e. AT&T Navigator at $10 per month, Vz's flawed music store).
2. Use the carrier controlled apps (crap-ware) to make "their" smartphone act and feel different to the user. Ivory tower cellular execs feel this will help them avoid being a dumb pipe and elevate the value of their brand WITHOUT having to dive into the murky waters of content creation or elegant user interfaces.
3. Ivory tower cellular execs feel the addition of their logo on the outside of the phone also adds value to their brand. (Note: there is a phrase for such fault self-induced-solitary-pleasure, but ivory tower cellular execs would deny ever m*********** in public.)
The bottom line:
iPhone owners are voting for with their pocketbooks for a great UI, pre-screened apps, user choice of what gets installed when, rapid user-initiated iOS upgrades, and elegant backup and restore. Vz doesn't get it yet.
Except that if Verizon had the iphone in 2007 --- then you would have the chance to actually buy VZ Navigator at $10 a month from GIN in 2007.
But what did Apple do? Well, all you Apple fans got was a 2 year delay --- so that you could buy AT&T Navigator at the same $10 a month from itunes iphone app store --- in 2009.
Thanks for that link and it's not getting to that point it's gotten there as far as I'm concerned. I will hang on to my Droid for as long as possible.
There is no concern what so ever.
It is chicken or the egg problem.
All the handset manufacturers and carriers were leaning towards LiMO a few years back --- precisely because LiMO's "open source" license allowed them to fork the source code, put a bunch of proprietary stuff on top and keep the source code private.
The ONLY way Google could attract handset manufacturers and carriers to adopt Android instead of LiMO --- was to provide the same "open source" terms that allow them to fork the source code, put a bunch of proprietary stuff on top and keep the source code private.
Hell, Motorola has been selling linux phones in Asia since 2003 --- and these are some of the most locked up phones on earth. Linux hackers --- even with the source code provided by Motorola --- couldn't do a thing since 2003.
You don't like the red Verizon UI, fine --- but Verizon is no where close to being investigated by anyone for anti-trust bullying.
It just means they've bought up enough congressmen to fly under the radar. If apple took all their available cash and spent it on lobbying, we'd be living in the republic of apple, inc.
It just means they've bought up enough congressmen to fly under the radar. If apple took all their available cash and spent it on lobbying, we'd be living in the republic of apple, inc.
No, it just means that Apple became the big brother in the 1984 commercial and Google is a giant evil-doing company. These are giant companies dwarfing the carriers and headed by billionaires who can literally lose billions of dollars to destroy your tiny company's business model --- a la Microsoft style.
Hell, if you support the giant evil Microsoft --- at the very least, you know that Bill Gates is donating his fortune to save the world.
If Apple does indeed produce a CDMA iPhone, would it not make sense to sell it fully unlocked through the Apple store and let people decide which CDMA network to join.
Actually, it's more like he's donating his fortune to save his reputation.
Just like the old IBM, Apple is being investigated by FTC for anti-trust concerns.
Do you think that Warren Buffett is donating all his fortunes to Bill Gates Foundation because Buffett thinks that Gates is merely doing an act. You can tell a lot by the friends you keep.
THis is what I have heard from a high ranking Verizon Exec. a friend of a friend. we will see. I am on Tmobile and have too great a rate to switch to verizon, but thats what i heard, and i believe this one.
THis is what I have heard from a high ranking Verizon Exec. a friend of a friend. we will see. I am on Tmobile and have too great a rate to switch to verizon, but thats what i heard, and i believe this one.
It's all these "friend of a friend who's a high-ranking Verizon employee" deals that cause me to be so skeptical of these rumors.
Makes me think of this:
Quote:
Dark Helmet: I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Gee the analysis are finally figuring out what I have been saying all along about a deal between Apple and VZ. The only way it will happen is if VZ gives up things which for some reason they deem a deal breaker like their logo on the phone or their VCast software, or locking out feature they do not want consumer having access to unless you are willing to pay extra for them.
I personally do not see VZ changing, they have not changes their business practices in last 30 yrs what makes any of you think that they will change now. They got the likes of Motorola and other cell phone companies under their thumb and they believe they can break the Apple experience with their branded phones and software and charge all you idiots for it.
Just like the old IBM, Apple is being investigated by FTC for anti-trust concerns.
This is just a dumb comment. There are no parallels in Apple's business operations to those of IBM at that time. I continue to be astounded at the lack of reasoning demonstrated by so many who seem to think that if one can identify one characteristic in common between two things one has shown that they are the same.
Quote:
Do you think that Warren Buffett is donating all his fortunes to Bill Gates Foundation because Buffett thinks that Gates is merely doing an act. You can tell a lot by the friends you keep.
Another dumb comment, bereft of logic, and entirely beside the point.
If Apple does indeed produce a CDMA iPhone, would it not make sense to sell it fully unlocked through the Apple store and let people decide which CDMA network to join.
Could Verizon block CDMA iPhones on its network?
Yeah VZ does it every day, you can not activate a phone on VZ network without them being involved with the activation. You can buy any VZ CDMA phone from anyone one but you can not transfer your number to that phone without them doing it for you. Unlike GSM phone which required transferring the SIM card
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Actually, it's more like he's donating his fortune to save his reputation.
Have to agree, it is not like he started doing this day one or the day after he made his first million or billion in that case. I would say Gates is no better than Andrew Carnegie, Rockefeller, Or Hurst, All these men made their money off the backs of others then later in life they decided to give back since everyone hated them and they did not want to go down in history as the most hate men of their times. Gates is falling into that mold.
This is just a dumb comment. There are no parallels in Apple's business operations to those of IBM at that time. I continue to be astounded at the lack of reasoning demonstrated by so many who seem to think that if one can identify one characteristic in common between two things one has shown that they are the same.
Another dumb comment, bereft of logic, and entirely beside the point.
That's right, IBM's business operations were different --- that's why IBM was clear by anti-trust cops. So what happens if Apple gets nailed right now and IBM was clear 20 25 years ago? Then Apple is worse than IBM's big brother.
You don't have any logic at all --- you just have a personal hatred of Bill Gates and you try to spin his philanthropic activities. In fact, according to your theory --- then the only person that is truly philanthropic is Warren Buffett --- because he donates his money not through his "named" foundation, but through Bill Gates' foundation.
Have to agree, it is not like he started doing this day one or the day after he made his first million or billion in that case. I would say Gates is no better than Andrew Carnegie, Rockefeller, Or Hurst, All these men made their money off the backs of others then later in life they decided to give back since everyone hated them and they did not want to go down in history as the most hate men of their times. Gates is falling into that mold.
When Bill Gates made his first billion dollars, he didn't donate --- but he didn't buy himself a super yacht or a trophy wife either. Benefit of the doubt goes to Gates --- that he just spent all his time on Microsoft as the super geek. You don't ever read news about him with super expensive toys.
Comments
That's why Apple's pro-consumer experience stand is so important. Apple is possibly the only company besides possibly Microsoft who can't be bullied by the cellular networks into playing their branding and "value-add" games. And yes, AT&T and Sprint are doing it too. It would be like trying to sell electricity 2.0.
This editorial about the Samsung Fascinate sums it up nicely:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092503456.html
It's getting to the point where Android fans are concerned about the direction this is going.
Apple, Google and Microsoft are bigger than every single carrier in the world --- it means that they are bullying the carriers, not the other way around.
Co-incidentally Apple, Google and Microsoft are constantly being under the government radar for anti-trust investigations.
You don't like the red Verizon UI, fine --- but Verizon is no where close to being investigated by anyone for anti-trust bullying.
That's why Apple's pro-consumer experience stand is so important. Apple is possibly the only company besides possibly Microsoft who can't be bullied by the cellular networks into playing their branding and "value-add" games. And yes, AT&T and Sprint are doing it too. It would be like trying to sell electricity 2.0.
This editorial about the Samsung Fascinate sums it up nicely:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092503456.html
It's getting to the point where Android fans are concerned about the direction this is going.
Thanks for that link and it's not getting to that point it's gotten there as far as I'm concerned. I will hang on to my Droid for as long as possible.
I was involved in carrier negotiations in the past. The issue is that the cellular carriers feel they can:
1. Monetize apps that they control over and above the data plan price (i.e. AT&T Navigator at $10 per month, Vz's flawed music store).
2. Use the carrier controlled apps (crap-ware) to make "their" smartphone act and feel different to the user. Ivory tower cellular execs feel this will help them avoid being a dumb pipe and elevate the value of their brand WITHOUT having to dive into the murky waters of content creation or elegant user interfaces.
3. Ivory tower cellular execs feel the addition of their logo on the outside of the phone also adds value to their brand. (Note: there is a phrase for such fault self-induced-solitary-pleasure, but ivory tower cellular execs would deny ever m*********** in public.)
The bottom line:
iPhone owners are voting for with their pocketbooks for a great UI, pre-screened apps, user choice of what gets installed when, rapid user-initiated iOS upgrades, and elegant backup and restore. Vz doesn't get it yet.
Except that if Verizon had the iphone in 2007 --- then you would have the chance to actually buy VZ Navigator at $10 a month from GIN in 2007.
But what did Apple do? Well, all you Apple fans got was a 2 year delay --- so that you could buy AT&T Navigator at the same $10 a month from itunes iphone app store --- in 2009.
I rather have the navigation app 2 years earlier.
Thanks for that link and it's not getting to that point it's gotten there as far as I'm concerned. I will hang on to my Droid for as long as possible.
There is no concern what so ever.
It is chicken or the egg problem.
All the handset manufacturers and carriers were leaning towards LiMO a few years back --- precisely because LiMO's "open source" license allowed them to fork the source code, put a bunch of proprietary stuff on top and keep the source code private.
The ONLY way Google could attract handset manufacturers and carriers to adopt Android instead of LiMO --- was to provide the same "open source" terms that allow them to fork the source code, put a bunch of proprietary stuff on top and keep the source code private.
Hell, Motorola has been selling linux phones in Asia since 2003 --- and these are some of the most locked up phones on earth. Linux hackers --- even with the source code provided by Motorola --- couldn't do a thing since 2003.
Opportunities have been there and the negotiations have never bore any fruits.
You don't like the red Verizon UI, fine --- but Verizon is no where close to being investigated by anyone for anti-trust bullying.
It just means they've bought up enough congressmen to fly under the radar. If apple took all their available cash and spent it on lobbying, we'd be living in the republic of apple, inc.
How can that be legal?
If you continue your old contract or pay the ETF, the phone should free and clear!
.
Well, there's legal, then there's "accepted business practices."
Rarely, if ever, do the two ever meet.
It just means they've bought up enough congressmen to fly under the radar. If apple took all their available cash and spent it on lobbying, we'd be living in the republic of apple, inc.
No, it just means that Apple became the big brother in the 1984 commercial and Google is a giant evil-doing company. These are giant companies dwarfing the carriers and headed by billionaires who can literally lose billions of dollars to destroy your tiny company's business model --- a la Microsoft style.
Hell, if you support the giant evil Microsoft --- at the very least, you know that Bill Gates is donating his fortune to save the world.
Could Verizon block CDMA iPhones on its network?
Could Verizon block CDMA iPhones on its network?
Of course.
They'd lose tens of millions of dollars in revenue and a couple hundred million more overnight due to the negative PR, but sure, they could do that.
No, it just means that Apple became the big brother in the 1984 commercial...
Ridiculously false.
... and Google is a giant evil-doing company. ...
Well, that's true.
Hell, if you support the giant evil Microsoft --- at the very least, you know that Bill Gates is donating his fortune to save the world.
Actually, it's more like he's donating his fortune to save his reputation.
Ridiculously false.
Actually, it's more like he's donating his fortune to save his reputation.
Just like the old IBM, Apple is being investigated by FTC for anti-trust concerns.
Do you think that Warren Buffett is donating all his fortunes to Bill Gates Foundation because Buffett thinks that Gates is merely doing an act. You can tell a lot by the friends you keep.
THis is what I have heard from a high ranking Verizon Exec. a friend of a friend. we will see. I am on Tmobile and have too great a rate to switch to verizon, but thats what i heard, and i believe this one.
It's all these "friend of a friend who's a high-ranking Verizon employee" deals that cause me to be so skeptical of these rumors.
Makes me think of this:
Dark Helmet: I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Lone Starr: What's that make us?
Dark Helmet: Absolutely nothing!
I personally do not see VZ changing, they have not changes their business practices in last 30 yrs what makes any of you think that they will change now. They got the likes of Motorola and other cell phone companies under their thumb and they believe they can break the Apple experience with their branded phones and software and charge all you idiots for it.
Just like the old IBM, Apple is being investigated by FTC for anti-trust concerns.
This is just a dumb comment. There are no parallels in Apple's business operations to those of IBM at that time. I continue to be astounded at the lack of reasoning demonstrated by so many who seem to think that if one can identify one characteristic in common between two things one has shown that they are the same.
Do you think that Warren Buffett is donating all his fortunes to Bill Gates Foundation because Buffett thinks that Gates is merely doing an act. You can tell a lot by the friends you keep.
Another dumb comment, bereft of logic, and entirely beside the point.
If Apple does indeed produce a CDMA iPhone, would it not make sense to sell it fully unlocked through the Apple store and let people decide which CDMA network to join.
Could Verizon block CDMA iPhones on its network?
Yeah VZ does it every day, you can not activate a phone on VZ network without them being involved with the activation. You can buy any VZ CDMA phone from anyone one but you can not transfer your number to that phone without them doing it for you. Unlike GSM phone which required transferring the SIM card
Actually, it's more like he's donating his fortune to save his reputation.
Have to agree, it is not like he started doing this day one or the day after he made his first million or billion in that case. I would say Gates is no better than Andrew Carnegie, Rockefeller, Or Hurst, All these men made their money off the backs of others then later in life they decided to give back since everyone hated them and they did not want to go down in history as the most hate men of their times. Gates is falling into that mold.
This is just a dumb comment. There are no parallels in Apple's business operations to those of IBM at that time. I continue to be astounded at the lack of reasoning demonstrated by so many who seem to think that if one can identify one characteristic in common between two things one has shown that they are the same.
Another dumb comment, bereft of logic, and entirely beside the point.
That's right, IBM's business operations were different --- that's why IBM was clear by anti-trust cops. So what happens if Apple gets nailed right now and IBM was clear 20 25 years ago? Then Apple is worse than IBM's big brother.
You don't have any logic at all --- you just have a personal hatred of Bill Gates and you try to spin his philanthropic activities. In fact, according to your theory --- then the only person that is truly philanthropic is Warren Buffett --- because he donates his money not through his "named" foundation, but through Bill Gates' foundation.
Have to agree, it is not like he started doing this day one or the day after he made his first million or billion in that case. I would say Gates is no better than Andrew Carnegie, Rockefeller, Or Hurst, All these men made their money off the backs of others then later in life they decided to give back since everyone hated them and they did not want to go down in history as the most hate men of their times. Gates is falling into that mold.
When Bill Gates made his first billion dollars, he didn't donate --- but he didn't buy himself a super yacht or a trophy wife either. Benefit of the doubt goes to Gates --- that he just spent all his time on Microsoft as the super geek. You don't ever read news about him with super expensive toys.